Allowed

Ram Sewak Singh v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC4 Dec 2012CWJC/21907/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A single judge quashed an administrative order directing a tenant to vacate premises following a private buyer’s petition, holding the authority lacked jurisdiction and the buyer should have filed an eviction suit.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order directing the petitioner to vacate the premises by 22.11.2012 was quashed. The purchaser was granted liberty to file an eviction suit.

Ram Sewak Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Landlord and Tenant | Patna HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21907 of 2012

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Ram Sewak Singh Son Of Shri Chandeshwar Prasad Singh Resident of Mohalla- Ram Nagar, P.S.- K. Hat, District- Purnea

¶5

.... .... Petitioner Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar 2. The Collector, Purnea 3. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar, Purnea 4. Hari Prasad Vaishyantri Son of Late Khushi Lal Vaishyantri Resident of Mohalla- Bhatta Bazar, Zila School, P.S.- K. Hat, District- Purnea 5. Dharm Narayan Sah Son of Late Saryug Lal Sah R/O High School Para, P.S. Katihar, District Katihar

¶7

.... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : M/s N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate, Dr. Bidhu Ranjan & Ashok Kumar Jha, Advocates For the State : Mr. P.K. Sinha, AC to SC-11 For Respondent no.4 : M/s Rajeeva Roy & Manok Kumar Jha, Advocates ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.N. SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶8

2 04-12-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the State and the counsel for the private Respondent no. 4 at whose instance Case No. 351 P/2012, Annexure-4 was initiated by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Purnea.

¶9

It appears, petitioner herein has been directed to vacate the shop in question by 22.11.2012 under the impugned order contained in Memo No. 2848 dated 16.11.2012, Annexure-4 on the ground that Respondent no.4 is the purchaser of the shop in question

¶10

Patna High Court CWJC No.21907 of 2012 (2) dt.04-12-2012

¶11

2 / 3

¶12

and he is in unauthorized possession thereof.

¶13

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that Case No. 351 P/2012 was initiated on the petition filed on behalf of Respondent no.4 before the SubDivisional Magistrate dated 10.10.2012, Annexure-1 perusal thereof would indicate that Respondent no.4 is the purchaser of the premises in question in which petitioner was a tenant from before.

¶14

As petitioner was the tenant in the premises in question from before the purchase made by Respondent no.4, in my opinion, was subject to the tenancy existing on the date of purchase. Respondent no.4 instead of moving the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Purnea should have filed a suit for eviction of the petitioner from the shop in question. The impugned order dated 16.11.2012, Annexure-4 directing the petitioner to vacate the premises in question by 22.11.2012 is wholly without jurisdiction and is quashed, however, with liberty to Respondent no.4 to file eviction suit. Civil Administration, Purnea is also at liberty to initiate appropriate proceeding under the Cr.P.C. for controlling the Law & Order situation, if any, prevailing over the

¶15

Patna High Court CWJC No.21907 of 2012 (2) dt.04-12-2012

¶16

3 / 3

¶17

shop in question.

¶18

This writ petition is, accordingly, disposed

¶19

of.

¶20

Let this order be communicated to the SubDivisional Officer, Sadar, Purnea through fax on payment of usual charges by the petitioner.

¶21

(V.N. Sinha, J)

¶22

Arjun/-

Ram Sewak Singh v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Sewak Singh v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Khodaija Khatoon Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Ram Chandra Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Bhuneshwar Thakur Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner Employees Provident Fund . Vs M/s Swadeshi Vastralaya

Vijay Chandra Thakur Vs The Bihar State Board Of Hindu Religious Trust Board and Ors.

Tejwant Kumar Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.